maybay wrote:The Hinayana teachings one does hear from Mahayana masters are almost always stripped of their mythology, or clothed in a fantastic one.

Hmmm ... like the Anthill Sutta, for example?

Its like they're afraid for you, that you might fall into the trap of believing in a mechanical and perfectly understandable world. They're concerned you might actually believe in it. Some Mahayana scriptures say its a fault to read Hinayana.

To some extent, I think that's a fair criticism. However many Pali suttas are no less fantastic than some Mahayana sutras and even some tantric visions.

M.G. wrote:The Hinayana teachings one does hear from Mahayana masters are almost always stripped of their mythology, or clothed in a fantastic one. Its like they're afraid for you, that you might fall into the trap of believing in a mechanical and perfectly understandable world. They're concerned you might actually believe in it. Some Mahayana scriptures say its a fault to read Hinayana.

M.G. wrote:The Hinayana teachings one does hear from Mahayana masters are almost always stripped of their mythology, or clothed in a fantastic one. Its like they're afraid for you, that you might fall into the trap of believing in a mechanical and perfectly understandable world. They're concerned you might actually believe in it. Some Mahayana scriptures say its a fault to read Hinayana.

Aside from the late and modern polemics, the Mahayana is not really understood without first having a firm grasp of the Agamas - and since the Agamas only exist partially in translation, our best equivalent is the Pali canon. Mahayana writers all knew the Agamas very well and were simply building additions onto that house. To willfully refuse that reality is to walk around in a dark house when you could just turn on the lights.

Isn't it a bit short sighted to base such a statement on lexical analysis alone?

Your reply is a bit unclear.

Did you not understand the analysis? If you want to understand a word, you need a linguistic analysis of it, both etymological, grammatical and contextual.

Or are you trying to imply that Hinayana sutras exist? If so, kindly tell me which scriptures name themselves 'Hinayana'.

Jan Nattier's _Inquiry of Ugra_ is illuminating on this whole issue. The ideologies we are familiar with in Mahayana Sutras such as the Lotus are probably late developments in the process. It seems clear from the materials found in all of the extant Agama/Nikaya canons that the bodhisattva-yana developed within all of the early schools as an alternative path (some more than others - eg, the Dharmaguptakas went so far as to add the bodhisattva-pitaka to their canon). Indeed, Chinese pilgrims reported everyone living together in the same monasteries centuries after the Common Era. I personally suspect it is much more a matter of attitudes gotten in Tibet and China that hardened the categories of Hinayana/Mahayana polemics. And in those places it seems harmless enough after a fashion - there were no actual "Hinayanists" in those places, it was all abstractions to them. In India, Buddhism was not nearly so ideological - it was disciplinary - that is, organized around vinayas more than dharmas.

Kare wrote:Or are you trying to imply that Hinayana sutras exist? If so, kindly tell me which scriptures name themselves 'Hinayana'.

The Chinese didn't name their land China, nor did everyone to the east of the Indus start calling themselves Hindus. Let's not even talk about American Indians. Just so, the word is not the thing.Self-awareness is peculiar to the Mahayana Sutras.

People will know nothing and everythingRemember nothing and everythingThink nothing and everythingDo nothing and everything- Machig Labdron

Kare wrote:Or are you trying to imply that Hinayana sutras exist? If so, kindly tell me which scriptures name themselves 'Hinayana'.

The Chinese didn't name their land China, nor did everyone to the east of the Indus start calling themselves Hindus. Let's not even talk about American Indians. Just so, the word is not the thing.Self-awareness is peculiar to the Mahayana Sutras.

Nor did afro-americans call themselves Niggers, as far as I know.

I can understand that some ignorant people may happen to insult other people. We often do stupid things in our ignorance.

What I do not understand, is why some people insist on continuing to insult others, even after receiving correct information.

Since I consider myself to be a follower of Zen, I pretty much stick to Heart Sutra and Lotus Sutra, these being of the Prajnaparamita school.

I'd say that the Meta Sutta is THE first and foremost sutta, in spite of this.

And the Kalama sutra must always be kept in mind, as well.

I'll note that it's a long-standing practice in Zen to select one of the suttas from the Pali Canon for study as well, and since I'm also doing mindfulness meditation, that would be the Anapanasati Sutta. If I were of the Insight of Vippasana persuasion it would be the Maha-Satipatana Sutta, but for me I consider them to carry the same message.

It's very short, but I love the Heart Sutra.I love reading it, chanting it with the community, reflecting on it and reading about it.During my masters I did a course on selections from the Pali Canon. I think the suttas that make up the Majjhima Nikaya are my favourite from that.PK

There are few scriptures or sutras more profound then Verses on the Faith Mind written by Hsin Hsin Ming.It stirs something within, not a word too many or too few. Genuine in its simplicity and impact.

You're interested in reading Sutras that have been translated into English?

I'm interested in learning the sutras more as well. Maybe we can make a daily sutra studies thread moving as a group.

I find the teaching stories and parables to be a familiar approach to spiritual lessons (maybe because of my christian upbringing?)

Sometimes I want to focus on sutras /teachings that can be meditated on and are directly applied in your daily practice.

I enjoy studying the pali suttas at accesstoinsight.com and will search key terms:ie samadhi or jhana if you're wanting to learn more about right concentration. or asavas / fermentations / cankers etc if you're wanting to learn more about the distortions of the mind.

Then I write down the short code of the sutra in my notes which really helps for later reference.

(I don't know of any online searchable sources of Mayayana sutras that are set up like this for easy study)

I understand the abhidarma-hosa, heart sutra, diamon sutra are all key texts, but at the moment I don't find them 'easy' reading.